Saturday, March 14, 2015

Friday, February 27, 2015

I write about a case that recently came before you, Hodge v Talkin, on appeal from the sweeping decision by Judge Beryl A. Howell of the US District Court for D.C. He ruled that Mr Hodge, who was standing alone on the Plaza in front of the Supreme Court holding a sign that said “The US Gov Allows police to illegally murder and brutalize African Americans and Hispanic People”, should not be convicted of a violation of 40 USC §6135.

Friday, February 06, 2015

The notion that smoke comes from the transmission system is silly of course, but what is the thought behind it? Answer: That transmission is wasteful. Transmission, even long distance transmission, is not bad compared to trucking the coal to a local plant, or to get short-term access to backup power. Or, more importantly, to the 60% energy loss in generating electricity by heating water and making steam to drive a turbine.

The video has the power plant as a puffing monster, belching smoke, and it is true that co2 comes out from burning fuel as with all combustion, the other pollutants can be removed if you want to. The soot is cleaned by electrostatic precipitators, but not "too clean". No cleaner than required by the regs, since it costs money to clean out the soot.

The mercury and the radioactive stuff should also be cleaned out, and why not just require that, or say that it is too costly. Why pretend, or plant in the public imagination via cartoons, that nothing can be done to clean up the exhaust?

Saturday, April 05, 2014

You can be held up by a robber with a gun who threatens to kill you if you don't comply, or you can be held up by a system that threatens to starve you. Capitalism began with the industrial counter-revolution, an anti-democratic revolution, the replacement of men, where wage slavery replaced regular slavery. This allowed an illusory advance in social justice which did not produce a parallel economic justice, since the industrialists could write the laws and rent the police.

From national administration to administration, corporations have run roughshod and those who are supposed to protect us from the danger and death these industries cause have regularly not done their jobs. Sometimes the situation is more pronounced as during the Reagan administration—a thoroughly obvious time of foxes guarding henhouses.

Rita LaValle, a PR person for Aerojet General Corp. involved in hazardous waste-dumping and water pollution, who became director of the “Superfund” program; John Todhunter, an opponent of restrictions on pesticides with the chemical industry-financed American Council on Science and Health, who became assistant administrator for pesticides and toxic substances at EPA; Kathleen Bennett, who as a lobbyist for the paper industry fought the Clean Air Act, named assistant EPA administrator for air pollution control programs and supervisor of the Clean Air Act; and on and on.

Throughout the many decades since, government control, regulation, has been surrendered, in part and sometimes entirely, to business interests. This includes not only the food and drug industries but the auto industry, the nuclear industry, now the gas industry for the toxic process called hydraulic fracturing or fracking, and on and on.

Thursday, March 06, 2014

for the NYS draft Energy Plan at the UB Center for Tomorrow.
Lots of fluff. You would think that you could say something informative in five pages, and then support it with the rest. That does not seem to be the case. Lots of ambiguous posturing and buzz words, which give no hint as to what the issue is that is being addressed, or what they even thing should be done, or what should not be done.

3. Judge convicts and issues order of protection[text] "This has to stop." Hence the orders of protection.
Judge Gideon explains his decision, and the orders of protection, as a delicate balance. Don't interfere with the ability of the Pepsi man to restock the pop-machines in a timely fashion with orange Fanta.

Probably our fault that he missed the point that this is an illegal program of assassination, extra judicial killing, summary execution, a high crime, and properly before the judiciary. It is not only a moral issue, but a legal issue, and not only an international crime, but an unconstitutional usurpation of power, and violation of the 5th amendment. If it is done under "war powers", can the Nobel Peace Prize winner and the others in the unitary executive branch kill anyone, anywhere, that they determine, under the theory that we have been invited into a counter-revolutionary struggle by a local tyrant, to kill his people, or people of a like mind in a neighboring country, and that the term "theater of war" includes a busy restaurant in a peaceful neighborhood, or a cafe? If so, say so, but stop complaining about all the suicide bombers.

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

On Terror Tuesdays, president Obama goes down a list and selects persons to be killed. Then someone sends that information out to his assassins.

These persons have not been convicted of a capital crime. The Fifth amendment says that "No Person shall be deprived of life without the due process of law." This amendment means that all persons shall have access to the courts before they are killed.

During the Civil Rights struggle, blacks wore signs saying "I am a man". We have forgotten.

Monday, December 02, 2013

Sunday, November 10, 2013

God promised a land to Abraham, and he delivered on that promise. Then Absalom raised the taxes, and the northern kingdom revolted, becoming the country of Samaria. Jeremiah warned that God was angry at the jews in Judah and would take take that kingdom away too, which He did.

When the UN gave the southern kingdom back, plus the northern kingdom, plus Eilat, they did not ask God if it was His will. We see this is not working out well, from a human-rights perspective.

Does God want Israel to return into exile?

Remember Kadish Barnea - where the jews were told to go into the land that was prepared for them. Kadish Barnea is south of Bersheeba, but in any case, was not part of the land of Israel. Joshua went it and came back and said - Nice place. But the others said - too many giants. Nobody wanted to go. So God changed his mind. Then they changed their mind, and did go, despite being told - hey wait. And got beaten up, and had to retreat to wander for 40 years in the Negev. Now they think they own the Negev. They don't.

Friday, September 13, 2013

A tax upon wealth, upon the wealthy.
This provision was eliminated in the Constitution.
-----
Article VIII. All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence or general welfare, and allowed by the united states in congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several states, in proportion to the value of all land within each state, granted to or surveyed for any Person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated, according to such mode as the united states, in congress assembled, shall, from time to time, direct and appoint. The taxes for paying that proportion shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several states within the time agreed upon by the united states in congress assembled.

Monday, September 09, 2013

The 1903 lease documents have no clauses that give a termination date for the lease. The motivation for the lease is mutual protection, and the method is Naval and Coaling Stations.
The motivation has been abandoned, and the means are obsolete.

1. No longer necessary as a coaling station
2. No longer necessary as a Naval Station for the mutual defense of the US and Cuba

The lease may be terminated for the reasons that a contract may be terminated, since a lease is a contract.
1. Material breach
Building a prison is a material breach
2. Anticipatory Breach
Kennedy's promise to not invade Cuba is an anticipatory breach of the US's duty to protect Cuban independence.

The larger the police force, the less you need the consent of the majority, and the easier it is to go with minority rule.

Points along the axis of consent are agreement, deference, objection, and opposition. The ship of state floats in a sea of struggle. The point of the ship is to keep the water out. If it doesn't do that, it has no point.

Monday, August 19, 2013

The red area is 200
The blue area is the product of the final digits.
So, for example, 13 * 17 = 200 + 21
-----
The same picture can be drawn for multiplication of
certain two 2-digit numbers in the 20's, the 30's, etc,
where the basic "red" amount is the product of the
upper and the lower multiple of ten.
32*38=30*40+2*8, for example; or 1216
-----
If you can multiple the numbers from 1 through 19 in your head, which is not all that hard, you can then extend this same method to multiplying two numbers in adjacent "tens", where the units add to 10
like 21*39 = 20*40+1*19 = 800 + 19 = 819, and
like 23*37 = 20*40+3*17 = 800 + 51 = 851, and
like 30*30 = 20*40+10*10= 800 +100 = 900

Monday, August 12, 2013

That someday soon we will be allowed to do this again.
36 CFR 7.96(g)(3)(ii)(B)
The Lincoln Memorial, ... and the single series of marble stairs immediately adjacent to and below that level.
----
Oops. Turns out we can. My bad.

Thursday, July 11, 2013

View Larger Map
Engine found ~200 ft short of the crash site. Did it come off prior to the crash?
No, the engine was found at Highland and Clinton, 190 ft past.
Someone could estimate the speed needed for this.
LoudLabs video here

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

The prosecution wants to introduce the pay rates of various military grades. Why? They want to say Bradley stole something, and the something was worth over $1000 dollars, and hey buddy that's felony territory. You are in big trouble now. Using the labor theory of value, they want to say that data cost x hours at y dollars per hour to create, and x times y is $102,000. Guilty.

Yes, there is a difference between stealing a baseball and stealing a baseball signed by the New York Yankees; namely the replacement cost is higher. But Bradley did not steal the data in that sense; it is closer to copyright violation type of stealing. And the value of a pirated copy of Michael Jackson's Black or White CD does not depend on the pay rates of the studio musicians.

Wednesday, June 05, 2013

Sunday, May 19, 2013

The phrase can be paraphrased as
If the speech creates the possibility that it might result in effective opposition to government policy, in this case of the draft law, then that speech is not protected by the Constitution.
This understanding of the First Amendment, by Oliver Wendell Holmes, seems not so good, especially comparing it to Justice L. Hand's ruling earlier in the "Masses" (the name of the publication) case.

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Friday, March 29, 2013

"The United States shall exercise complete jurisdiction and control" over Guantanamo
Does this mean that the US can do anything it wants? Ignore the Bill of Rights? Violate international law? Violate the lease whose terms it stands on? I don't think so.

Thursday, March 28, 2013

The US claims to occupy the Naval Base subject to a valid lease. That's a big one, for surely even the Americans can see that a lease grants the use of a property only for certain things, all of which must be legal, and the landlord can evict you if you violate the terms.

Are the relations between Cuba and the US the same as set out in Treaty of Relations of 1903? Is the US is still best friends with Cuba, or if it's not, was Cuba wrong for getting rid of Batista and the mob?

Is America right to say that the Bill of Rights contains inalienable rights, given by God, to Americans and to no one else?

Are people right to think that knowing the truth will lead to justice?

Saturday, March 09, 2013

Would the Government of Cuba be willing to consider leasing Guantanamo Bay to the US for a Naval Station?
This may seem like a foolish question, but since the current lease is invalid, and the US cannot be ejected by force, a possible solution might be to negotiate a valid lease, to at least put the occupation on a marginally agreeable and legal foundation.

The advantages seem to be many, but most especially, if this territorial dispute can be settled in this way (and may I suggest that the UN be the bargaining representative for the nation of Cuba?), possibly the Palestine question could be resolved using a similar mechanism. This would indeed be a wonderful contribution to world peace in which Cuba could lead the way.

Sunday, March 03, 2013

If a soldier kills a civilian, or two, it is lawful combat. If a civilian kills a soldier, it is unlawful combat. This is called asymmetric warfare.
------
Bush said he would not distinguish between Al Qaida and those who harbored Al Qaida. The Taliban, who governed Afghanistan, harbored al Qaida. So we declared war on Afghanistan. (Didn't we?) Taliban prisoners are prisoners of war. If we make no distinction, Al Qaida prisoners are prisoners of war as well.
------
During the revolutionary war, most of the naval forces were privateers. This afforded POW status if captured.
Were the Blackwater contractors lawful or unlawful enemy combatants from the point of view of the people of Falluja?

In ten years of war, how can it be that we have taken no prisoners? Is not each person taken by the military a prisoner of war, or assumed to be a prisoner of war unless he loses that status through some process in accord with our system of laws? Or is the military above the law and outside the law?

The lease limits the US to military use of the Bay. Since there are no coal fueled ships remaining in the US Navy, the US has ceased to used the Bay as a coaling station. There are no carriers home ported to Guantanamo Bay. USS Gambier Bay (CVE-73) was associated with Guantanamo Bay. It was a Casablanca class escort carrier, sunk in the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

A navy is not simply a collection of ships or fighting vessels. It is a process of activities ranging from securing those vessels, raising crews, provisions, arms, munitions, finding ways to resupply those vessels, finding ways to pay all those people, commissioning officers, establishing rules, codes of conduct, and deciding on a naval strategy.
Glenn Grasson, on Cspan3 @2:30, quoting Christopher Magra in The Fisherman's Cause

Not Hawaii, Guam, Diego Garcia?
Not Pul-e-Charkhi Prison? The Russians had prisons you know.
After the First Gulf War, where POWs were a problem,
no POW Camp was "ready" for the second Gulf War
according to Inside Gitmo, p16. $0.01+shipping, Amazon.
Did they check the 1903 lease agreement to see if building a POW camp was allowed in Cuba?
No. No, they didn't.

Friday, March 01, 2013

and no other.
------
A POW camp is not a Naval Station, and constructing a POW camp at Guantanamo is not necessary to fit Guantanamo Bay for use as a naval station. It may be that not all prisoners in a POW camp are classified as prisoners of war, however it is clear that the camp is a POW camp; these people are being detained without charge until the war is over, to keep them from the war.
------
Guantanamo was picked for the POW camp by the Department of Justice, not the Department of the Navy.
------
Guantanamo already had a brig.

Sunday, February 24, 2013

Saturday, February 23, 2013

The February 1903 lease agreement for Guantanamo states that the United States is allowed
"generally to do any and all things necessary to fit the premises for use as coaling or naval stations only, and for no other purpose."

The prison was built at Guantanamo, not because of the excellent harbor, but because it was thought to be a legal black hole, out of reach of the courts, because of the Supreme Court rulings in the Insular Cases, that the Constitution does not "follow the flag". The flag, they say, is sometimes only a sign of imperial domination, of unchecked military power.

Since the siting of the prison was motivated by this rationale, it violates the terms of the lease, which only allows the site generally to be fitted to the purpose of a naval station, only, and not any additional purpose.

The permanent arbitrary detention of people, in violation of the rights of man, the Constitution, and international conventions, is not generally held to be a necessary function of a military installation, despite its frequency.

1903 Article III: "That the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene for the preservation of the Cuban independence, the maintenance of a government adequate for the protection of life, property, and individual liberty, and for discharging the obligations with respect to Cuba imposed by the treaty of Paris on the United States, now to be assumed and undertaken by the government of Cuba."

The US interprets the 1903 Article III to mean that the Cuban government gives consent, in advance, for interventions that otherwise, without consent, would be a violation of Cuban self-government, which self-government was transferred to the Cuban people via the Treaty of Paris and because the Teller Amendment kept the US from outright seizure of Cuba. This placed Cuba under the benevolent eye of the United States.

1934 Article I: "The treaty of Relations which was concluded between the two contracting parties on May 22, 1903, shall cease to be in force, and is abrogated, from the date on which the present Treaty goes into effect."

1934 Article I cancels 1903 Article III, which granted blanket consent to intervention, yet the United States, through boycotts, quarantines, blockades, over-flights, invasion, and black operations, continues to act as though 1903 Article III were in effect, and pushes aside 1934 Article I. That makes these actions unfriendly, and a material and fundamental breach of the Treaty of 1934. They render that Treaty void, because they run counter to international expectations that promises must be kept, and constitute an unexpected substantial change to the underlying conditions, in that the Unites States no longer seeks the maintenance of the government of Cuba, but its destruction.

This abrogation of the Treaty of 1934 on the part of the United States was matched by the equally hostile action of the invitation to the Russians by the Cubans to install nuclear weapons on its soil, something permitted by treaty, but an act that responded to the change in the underlying situation, and created further unexpected changes to the underlying situation.

Therefore, the Treaty of 1934 is voidable.
Since only the Treaty of 1934 addresses the question of the termination of the lease, the issue of lease termination is unspecified.

Friday, February 22, 2013

As United States Admiral La Rocque’s Center for Defense Information has observed, “It is clearly unnecessary militarily”. Indeed, in the modern world, Guantánamo has little strategic importance, unless we overstate the facilitation of logistics for the 1983 United States invasion of Grenada and the 1989 invasion of Panama, both carried out for the purpose of obtaining regime change by force.2003 Report of Alfred de Zayas

Thursday, February 21, 2013

With the abrogation in 1934 of the May 1903 Treaty of Relations, Cuba became free to enter into military arrangements with any nation for the purpose of securing its independence. The 1963 blockade of Cuba by the USA was intended to frustrate this purpose, which purpose was the benefit to Cuba to be secured by the 1903 lease, according to Article VII of the Appendix to the Constitution of Cuba, which was incorporated into the lease agreement.

The USA may prevent Cuban vessels from access to the ports in the Bay of Guantanamo, at its sole discretion, without that action being considered unfriendly. Any other action may be considered unfriendly, such as blocking access to the waters.

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

The lease agreement states that the purpose of the lease is to help the USA protect itself and to help the USA protect Cuba from a military threat to its independence.

The Bay of Pigs was an action undertaken that was inconsistent with that agreement. The US actions were not directed to protect the new Cuban government, but to overthrow it. This failure to come to the aid of the new Cuban government gives rise to a claim for damages. Years later, Kennedy promised to respect Cuban integrity, a promise that fell far short of the understanding that the USA would help to protect Cuba's independence from foreign military aggression. This is an anticipatory breach.

The US recognized that the Castro regime was the legitimate government of Cuba, since in 1959 the USA sent a check to the Castro regime, purportedly as payment under the lease. Further, the USA claims that the cashing of the check, in 1959, by the Castro regime constitutes the completion of a valid transaction required by the lease.

Sunday, February 17, 2013

"I. That the government of Cuba shall never enter into any treaty or other compact with any foreign power or powers which will impair or tend to impair the independence of Cuba nor in any manner authorize or permit any foreign power or powers to obtain by colonization or for military or naval purposes or otherwise, lodgement in or control over any portion of said island."

The US correctly realized that foreign entanglements are often problematic, especially for a young nation necessarily weak, and that allowing a foreign power to establish a military base on its soil could easily jeopardize the freedom of the people of Cuba.

If the Constitution does not apply in full at Guantanamo, then on what basis do we decide which parts do apply and which parts don't apply. The government wants to argue that all its rights and powers apply, but an individual's rights and powers are circumscribed. Very convenient.

The constitution must follow the flag. If the Constitution is not present, of what purpose is the flag? And where the Constitution is present, the human rights of people are present, must be present. US authority can be challenged by a claim of a conflicting authority, but our law must not bend at the pleasure of our servants.

It should not be thought that the rights found in the Bill of Rights are granted to the people by the Constitution; rather they are rights retained by the people; never the government's to give or withhold, of greater scope than the Constitution, not of lesser. These are the rights of all Englishmen, or now, the rights of all people.

Thursday, February 14, 2013

There are three documents at the Yale Law School, Avalon project, that seem to contain the mutual obligations of the USA and Cuba as regards Guantanamo Bay. These are
1. The May 29, 1934 Treaty of Relations which modified and replaced the Treaty of Relations signed at Habana, May 22,1903
2. The February 23, 1903 Lease part 1, the parcels
3. The July 2, 1903 Lease part 2, obligationsWikipedia summary

Monday, January 21, 2013

The assumption since King John, since 1215, is that responsible authorities need a reason, a rationale, for jailing a person. King John, a tyrant, signed off on this idea, much to the chagrin of the other tyrants, who stopped taking his phone calls.

What is the legal status of the prisoners in Guantanamo; what is our rationale for holding them?

The original term, illegal enemy combatant, expressed the claim that the US is at war with an enemy, that the prisoners belonged to that enemy, and that the prisoners used methods that violate the laws of war.

It is said that all things are fair in love and war. In war, the USA has proclaimed that some things are not fair: chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Any other methods are ok; that is, are methods that we ourselves would use, including blending-in by disguising ourselves as a polio eradication team, and thereby setting back the cause of polio eradication in Waziristan.

The notion that we are now engaged in World War III is never expressly said, and if the government does not dare to say it, it can hardly need to be denied.

Governments jail people in peace time and in war. Peacetime prisoners have been tried in court, and go home after a while. Prisoners of war go home, often when the war is over, except some of the higher-ups get tried for war crimes, for violating the laws of war. Holding others is neo-kidnapping, not generally accepted even if you paid money.

Our founding fathers, in the Bill of Rights, listed God-given rights of Englishmen; rights not given by the government. Recently we realized that those rights apply to all people, not just the men of English. You know the rights: the right to a fair trial, to be faced with your accuser, to reasonable bail, to be free from enhanced interrogation. And the Declaration of Independence listed among the abuses of another tyrant, King George, that he “transported us beyond the seas to be tried for pretended offenses”. This is a close description of the rendition of people to Guantanamo. And makes our George a tyrant.

Wishful thinking, delusion really, has put us in this legal nightmare. The way out is to shake it off.

Sunday, January 20, 2013

The so-called "settlers" drive through Palestine on expressways. The Palestinians do not have expressways; they have only local roads, and need to stop frequently at checkpoints, and have permits. The checkpoints make travel within Palestine difficult, and in the case of medical emergencies, the delays can be life threatening.

This injustice could be fixed; fixed by money.

Naftali Bennett proposes linking the areas, that are now separated by checkpoints, by creating a metro system for Palestine. This should connect Gaza to the West Bank as well. This plan is independent of the further theft of land from Palestine, which is also part of Bennett's plan. YouTube

A community organizer in Gaza has also explored the idea of a subway for Palestine, and has received positive responses from those who have seen it. Reaction on YouTube
Artist's prtfolio of stops here. System map -

Thursday, January 17, 2013

A trial is political if it protects the interests of the powerful. The government says that there are no political trials, since that claim protects the interests of the powerful.

However, examples of political prosecutions abound; a readily accessible one is the case of Tommy Chong, of Cheech and Chong, as documented in the film "AKA Tommy Chong", available in the usual places.

Our case in Buffalo is the case of Nate Buckley, arrested for trespassing, what else, during a demonstration in front of M+T Bank on April 8th, 2011, and obstructing the administration of justice. Here is a video of that event and arrest, from YouTube.

A trial was held for three defendants. Two were acquitted on a bench trial, but the jury phase, for Buckley alone, resulted in a mistrial, due to juror misconduct. A motion to dismiss the charge against Buckley in the interests of justice was granted by the judge. Here is the judge's ruling.

The District Attorney, Frank Sedita Jr., son of a former mayor, is appealing the dismissal. He intends to prosecute, despite the judge's written opinion that a conviction would represent a miscarriage of justice.

Note that besides the existence of political trials, there are political not-trials; people "too big to jail".

Saturday, January 05, 2013

Thursday, January 03, 2013

Here are some prominent people who believe that the first amendment protects the commercial press; protects a business enterprise: Huff Post
ie: bloggers don't count; in fact speaking doesn't count.
----
Here is the text in question: "or of the press"

Monday, December 31, 2012

No, I'm not gay. I don't literally mean fuck the men.
No, I am not advocating raping the women either, although a lot of women in the military are being raped by the men in the military.
Yes, I know a lot of young people are led by the invisible hand of the market into the military, to escape their desperate backgrounds. And, no, I don't expect them to be all noble, when they are only cooks stationed in West Germany, while indifferent Americans watch Notre Dame play Michigan in the Sugar Bowl.

What I mean is that many American soldiers, that I believe should know better, are indifferent to the plight of prisoners and civilians in their area of operation. The opposite of love, as in love your enemy, is not hate. It is indifference. So maybe they cannot be sent to jail for what they do; but they can be sent to hell.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

1951, Completes class at the School of the Americas.
1954, participates in the coup of Arbenz.
1970, named Chief of Staff of the Army of Guatemala.
1978, becomes a Pentecostal. Befriends Pat Robertson.
1982, seizes power, backed by the CIA
June 9th, starts the "guns or butter" program.
December, President Reagan says "Ríos Montt is a great man".
Israel sends military aid, and gives military training in Israel.
1983, CIA cable notes bodies are "appearing in ditches"
1999, Clinton apologizes for US support of reign of terror.
1999, Guatemalan government admits massacre at Dos Erres.
2012, Ríos Montt indicted for crimes against humanitywikipedia

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

Zero-Dark-Thirty, although it is a work of fiction, may cross the line of advocating "immanent lawless action". Torture is an ongoing policy of friend (Islam Karimov) and foe alike, and this movie may give aid and comfort to those who practice it.
We know that the Constitution allows immoral speech, but the government in other cases has sought to constrain speech in time of war if that speech poses a threat to national security.

Sunday, September 09, 2012

1. Methane burns to release energy, creating water and CO2.
So gas is cleaner, not clean.
Cleaner than what? Cleaner than coal.
2. Uranium does not burn to release energy.
Does this make nuclear cleaner than gas?
Consider the whole life cycle.
The mining, the waste, the accidents.

Sunday, August 19, 2012

In mythology, Circe was a powerful witch who, with the help of herbs, muttering incantations, or praying to her gods, could turn men into animals or create unsubstantial images of beasts. She was able to darken the heavens by hiding the moon or the sun behind clouds.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

vendor
It is true that with horizontal drilling, you can choose where to locate the drill rig, so that rigs do not need to be "in your face". But this flexibility is a feature of horizontal drilling of any kind. The environmental benefit is that this flexibility can be used to minimize disruption of the land surface. It does not address the environmental problems specific to fracking, or automatically result in a better landscape.

It might be the case that the owner of the desired site would not sign the lease agreement, but his neighbor would.

vendor
In conventional drilling,
&nbsp - The gas has migrated from an oily shale strata
&nbsp - to a porous sandstone reservoir.
&nbsp - A hole into the reservoir accesses the pressurized gas.
In fracking,
&nbsp - The gas has not migrated from the oily shale.
&nbsp - Sandy fluid is forced in to make channels for the gas
&nbsp - Some of the fluid comes back out and is a disposal problem.

Fracking injects sandy water plus additives into the well, to make cracks in the shale, and jam the cracks open. A third of the fluid that goes in comes out again, but now mixed with hydrocarbons and metals from the oily shale.
The first step in disposing of these produced fluids is to allow the fluid to evaporate. These vapors are one problem with fracking.